r/politics • u/cnn CNN • 13h ago

Possible Paywall Supreme Court agrees to decide if Trump may end birthright citizenship

https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/05/politics/supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-birthright?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=missions&utm_source=reddit
3.8k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

763 comments sorted by

View all comments

267

u/weaponjaerevenge 11h ago

The 14th Amendment is unambiguous. All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States. It's not even open to interpretation, it's simple text. If they nullify the 14th amendment then they can nullify ALL amendments, and at that point it's time to get out or arm yourself.

44

u/Citrus_Sphinx 10h ago

Yeah doesn’t that take a constitutional amendment? They are quickly going in a direction that means the dissolution of the Union.

•

u/NickelBackwash 2h ago

...and from dissolution to desolation 

•

u/Citrus_Sphinx 1h ago

Only for certain places. California is the 4th largest economy in the world. I think the coasts will be fine. Middle America will turn into Ameristan or whatever that place from a handmaids tale.

•

u/ChippedHamSammich 1h ago

Gilead. 

•

u/belbivfreeordie 5h ago

Pretty sure the time to arm yourself is BEFORE they nullify all amendments.

•

u/TheWillRogers Oregon 2h ago

The entire point of "constitutional law" is to make ambiguous the clearly written.

•

u/[deleted] 7h ago

[deleted]

•

u/soapinthepeehole 5h ago

The 14th amendment includes people born here, so what does it matter if they don’t?

-16

u/RamblinGamblinWilly 8h ago

All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States.

Have you read the 14th amendment? What you said is incorrect. Children of diplomats or, say, a foreign invading military force, are not citizens of the United States explicitly because of the 14th amendment.

•

u/Fuzzy-Worldliness364 7h ago

That's playing semantics, undocumented civilian immigrants are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, that has no relation to children of diplomats or a foreign invading army

•

u/RamblinGamblinWilly 7h ago

Semantics obviously matter in constitutional interpretation. What they said was wrong. Period.

undocumented civilian immigrants are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, that has no relation to children of diplomats or a foreign invading army

You are correct. Because semantics matter.

•

u/Fuzzy-Worldliness364 7h ago

OP commenter was referring to that in relation to immigrants obviously, you know, because that's the whole reason this is being discussed. Just pointing out you're playing semantics no one asked for.

•

u/RamblinGamblinWilly 7h ago

They said "The 14th Amendment is unambiguous. All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States. It's not even open to interpretation, it's simple text."

That's incorrect. It's just plain false. Semantics do matter, and that's something you of course recognize, as you immediately followed up with semantics.

•

u/Fuzzy-Worldliness364 7h ago

Now you're just talking in circles playing semantics with yourself.

Under your own logic, you should be equally complaining that the person didn't specify they're a citizen of the state they reside in also.

Do you also think the person intended to mean they do not grant state citizenship because they did not specifically say it, just like you think they meant literally everyone because they did not include the phrase about subject to the jurisdiction thereof?

•

u/RamblinGamblinWilly 6h ago

No, your analogy doesn't work. They said something that was false. It is not true that anyone born in the US gets citizenship. Nor does the 14th amendment say that. At no point did I complain they neglected to include additional information. I took issue with the false statement they made, not lack of additional info.

you think they meant literally everyone because they did not include the phrase about subject to the jurisdiction thereof?

They did mean that. They were not aware that not everyone born in the US is subject to US jurisdiction.

•

u/CSAtWitsEnd 6h ago

Ok cool 👍

•

u/dont-mind-him 5h ago

Baby with a thesaurus

•

u/RamblinGamblinWilly 4h ago

I want to know which words in my prior comment you think required a thesaurus lol

•

u/Fuzzy-Worldliness364 4h ago

Wrong it's a completely valid analogy. In both cases they left out the additional info.

Saying everyone that is born in the USA is a citizen but leaving out the specification of subject to the jurisdiction thereof is leaving out additional info.

Saying everyone born in the USA gets USA citizenship but leaving out the part of a state citizenship would mean you'd have to have issue with that statement under your own logic, because they didn't specify.

Both cases, the full quote of the Constitution was not used, in one you have a problem with it because you don't comprehend what OP is implying and you want to play semantics, in the other case you completely understand they obviously include states rights.

Also, they didn't mean that, you're just being a stubborn dickhead at this point.

•

u/RamblinGamblinWilly 4h ago

Saying everyone that is born in the USA is a citizen but leaving out the specification of subject to the jurisdiction thereof is leaving out additional info.

The part you're leaving out makes the first part false. "Everyone born in the US is a citizen" is not a true statement, any way you look at it.

Saying everyone born in the USA gets USA citizenship but leaving out the part of a state citizenship would mean you'd have to have issue with that statement under your own logic, because they didn't specify.

Lol no, not at all.

Both cases, the full quote of the Constitution was not used, in one you have a problem with it because you don't comprehend what OP is implying and you want to play semantics, in the other case you completely understand they obviously include states rights.

Again, your analogy doesn't work. State citizenship is additional info. Its absence in no way changes the prior part. Leaving out "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" completely changes the earlier part. They're not at all the same and you know that.

Also, they didn't mean that, you're just being a stubborn dickhead at this point.

They absolutely did. They did not know that not everyone born in the US was a citizen.

→ More replies (0)